Thats why the original judge ruled that the crimes they were charged with (terrorism) were not justified with 5 years of incarceration.

They were not charged with terrorism. They were charged with arson on federal property. The minimum sentence for arson on federal property is 5 years.
The first judge did not have the authority to reduce the minimum sentence so they were resentenced.

Whether or not the original conviction (arson) was valid is moot. They were convicted.

And now, Bundy is taking advantage over the controversy about the resentencing to promote his own agenda.

originally posted by: svetlana84
I am a bit confused about this situation.

It s going on since 2 days now and it's still not clear what the group's political demand is?

Attention. Right now they are bitching because they are expecting the FBI to come down heavy handed and perform another Waco, and if the FBI did that,
they'd certainly get the attention they are craving.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Huh... they used the media and brought up the past... go figure. Just as I said, they are hijacking this issue for their own agenda.

Talk about throwing an armed sit in and no one shows up.

Do you even see why they are protesting? The government has effectively committed double jeopardy in having these men RE sentenced. Forget if what
they did was the right thing or not. The ACLU should be jumping on this case in the men's defense.

Government: Hey Hammonds, you know that Arson you (supposedely) committed like 10 years ago? Well those prison sentences you served were to short. I'm
gonna need y'all to drop everything you've done since then, forget all your obligations and such come back down to the jail and stay for about 4 more
years, see ya then.

Many people in the area of this incident may be calling the Militia all manner of names or denouncing them publicly but I would hazard a guess that
the reason is they do nat want to be the next victim of the BLM. They don't have the money or time to fight the BLM so they are trying to hope it all
away.

Many people in the area have come out in support of the Hammonds. Not so much support for the militia.

See the difference? The people in Oregon seem to. They seem to understand that lawlessness is not an answer.

That does not make them correct.
Many times lawlessness IS the answer.

Maybe Rosa should have just followed the law and rode in the back of the bus...

Maybe we should still have seven year olds operating at steel mills.

Lawlessness is the answer!

Anyway, I have yet to see it posted/mentioned - the Hammonds are telling the militiamen to "go home."

The Hammonds’ attorney has previously stated the militiamen showing up in Burns do not represent the ranchers. Still, militiamen like Payne
continue to arrive.

The farmers don't even want the help of the militiamen.

Real "peaceful," all right.

They said it would be a peaceful march. Yet, threats are implied in many of the calls to protest from all quarters. Ammon Bundy writes that if
the Hammonds are imprisoned, “there will be some serious civil unrest.” And militiaman Ryan Payne said he will do “whatever it takes” to
support the Hammonds.

“What we’ve been threatened with here is civil unrest and the insinuations of armed rebellion,” said Sheriff Ward.

When the Hammonds leave for prison, Sheriff Ward said it’s local people who will be here to support the rest of the Hammond family. “These
folks from Montana and Michigan and Florida and Ohio—they’re not going to make sure that the family has firewood in the wintertime, and making
sure that their hay gets put up,” said Ward.

If the Hammonds won’t stand up for their rights…if the sheriff and the county commissioners won’t stand up for their rights…the people who
are there as protesters, as patriots, they do not have anybody to fight.”

Okay - this militiamen got their fifteen, now since this walks, talks, smells, and acts like a duck - can we treat it as one, already?

Peaceful sit-in protesting militiamen? Hahahahah, the only people dumb enough to believe and pander that line of logic are those that accuse every
Muslim of being some sort of super-secret-agent/spy, but hey - I digress.

They don't want violence but will get violent if they are to be removed? Sounds like they want violence. Remote HQ in the middle of the forest? I
would just leave them all up there to hang out until they finally went home to their lives. Not responding to them at all would send a message of not
giving a hoot about their protest and avoiding needless violence.

I like this idea. Why not post authorities at entry and exit points and let them live out their own "Survivor" episode. Looking at the physical state
of some of those guys I imagine it won't go a few days before at least a third of them are arrested at the gate as they leave to go on a Taco Bell or
Micky D run and once the beer runs dry they might very well turn on one another.

Since your plan is to take over the Malheur for years so, among other grievances, "hunters and fishers can shoot and cast", what is your plan so that
I can continue to hunt and fish there? If you charge a fee, what will it be? How will you decide the areas for those of us with guns to hunt and those
of us armed with only cameras to photograph the wildlife? Also, what is your management plan, so that the wildlife I hunt will be preserved in an
environment where they will thrive?

One last thing, since I'm assuming you know the history of the Malheur Preserve, if only because you're now its occupiers and have time to read the
displays there about it, you know that the preserve was created in 1908 to protect the dwindling bird population from being killed off for their
feathers. If you open up the Malheur to developers, what assurances can you give me that I will have something left to hunt and fish?

First, hopefully this will be resolved without war.
Second, hopefully our government will not seek to do a repeat of Waco.
Finally, here's a picture of the site, taken from the roadway via Google Street View... tho, like much of Google's domestic coverage, it looks to have
been taken in the late 19th century and then colorized.

It is, clearly, in the middle of nowhere so... no civilians are in any direct peril.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.